To many of those players, it may "feel" like SF2. It would be the same as Brawl players saying the agme feels like 64. It doesn't; you just think it does.Funny, I usually hear that SFIV borrowed primarily from 2 for gameplay. I myself can see the similarities as well.
I'll go though each of themHow exactly are the bold all that hard? I just have to press an extra button or the PPP/KKK button to use an EX attack. Focus attacks are really easy to learn, you just got to know when it's best for your character to use it, just like any attack in Smash. Cancels are easy as well, just do a dash forward or backward to get out of it. I see scrubs pull this stuff out easily. The hard part, if anything, is knowing when to use them.
EX-This is your problem. You look only at how hard it is to do one, not how it fits into the game. To everyone except competitive players, EXs are useless. I can fire a blue fireball, or a red one. It just adds layers to the game, but most players don't see that, nor do they care. They were a useless addition because only the top players could really use it. Everyone else didn't see the point.
Supers-The problem with SF4 is that the super, which is easier to do and is weaker, appear less then Ultras. Some characters don't even use their supers. I ask what the point of these were. Also, one motion is hard enough (which SF2 actually rewarded you for doing).
Ultras-Not only do these come up more, but they are harder to do. WTF? Plus, while 3 buttons doesn't sound hard, the window is so small of then to hit them. I have the same problem in TvC, so I have to use the L button (which is all three attack buttons).
Focus attacks-There isn't to much wrong with this, just that they cram too much stuff into the game
Focus cancel-I can't believe you think this is easy? Cancel anything is made for competitive players, and all it does is give them a huge advantage over weaker players. The problem is being able to do it on the fly. Plus, it's for the higher end players.
All of these are designed for dedicated Street Fighter players. So what am I suppose to do. It's no wonder SF has died and Smash has taken it's crown.
Seems like you dodged the question a little bit there.As for the Ultras, I will give it to you on Guile and Vega's Ultra as they have the most impractical motions out of all the characters in the cast, and that it's hard to pull it off unless you're on an arcade stick. Other than that, like everything in SF and Smash, you have to use Ultras wisely and find setups for them.
Let's compare them though
Final Smash-Press B when you have a Smash Ball
Ultra-Preform two unique motions in rapid succession and press three punches or three kicks (depending on the character).
You can see the gap.
First, the bold: What? No, every gamer wants the game to be different. They want it too add to what made the first one great. Super Mario Bros 3 was an amazing sequel because it added so much. 8 huge worlds, new power-pus, lots of new enemies, the Koppalings, and new features like carrying a turtle shell.I don't know if my opinions reflect the rest of the competitive community, but I don't think everyone is looking for a game to become harder. What I think they, and every other gamer, don't want are sequels that have little to no changes. At the same time, they want a lot of replay value.
Like I've said a million times, it's not that they are trying to make the game harder, they just demand features that would make the game harder. Does an ultra need to be that hard to do? No. But if it wasn't, the fans would go bonkers. They expect more depth and challenge, which in turn makes the game harder.
Let's look at an example: your Neo-Wavedashing. It lets you move quickly to the foe and attack. Newer player's will see no use because it would be just like running. It's also hard to do because you have to double tap back or forward, so it takes some precision. It will also widen the game between the top and lower level players. In turn, rather then spend so much time to try and get better, the player quits and find something they can like really quickly.
The thing is, while the players would want more people to play, they'd never want it too be more accessible. I've thought that to make Street Fighter big again, you'd have to go back to SF2. This would mean taking out most of the gameplay content (no ultra, EXs, Focus attacks, cancels of any kind and maybe supers). The problem is that the current fans would go ape ****. They'd hate it and see it as dumbed down. It would be hard to take off. The sad part is that Street Fighter is dead and can't come back from the grave. This also holds true for all other 2D fighting game sans Smash. So, this is the thing Smash has to avoid.
Part of the reason the competitive community would never accept anything to make the game more accessible is that they always see it as an "easy win" button. The auto-recovery idea was seen as just that. Complexity in game play does not make good games. Super Mario Bros. was run and jump and sometime shooting fireballs. Sports aren't hard either. Soccer is about kicking a ball. There is no super cancel or ultra shot in soccer. You kick, pass and shot. Done.What exactly is Smash's growth? To become as easy as possible where everyone can win? Like any sport, you have to spend time with playing the game in order to better at it. If I'm the type that wants to play the game with no pressure, I'll do so by minding my own business and not getting involved with the stronger players.
To grow, Smash has to attract players who would have never played Smash before. Basically, make Smash more assessable. From there, they need to do things that will keep current players such as adding new, interesting, and relevant characters, as well as stages and music and what not.